Legal Opinion

Engineering Specialties Co. v. Burgess Battery Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided July 12, 1941PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONGER, District Judge.

From a reading of the conflicting affidavits of the experts here, I feel constrained to deny the defendant’s application for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s patent has never been adjudicated and the fact that certain references herein were before the Patent Office lends greater presumptive force to the issuance of said patent. General Electric Co. v. Save Sales Co., 6 Cir., 82 F.2d 100. In view of this presumption of validity of plaintiff’s patent, defendant’s contention that said patent does not evidence sufficient improvement over the prior art to constitute invention…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. General Electric Co. v. Save Sales Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936
  2. Refractolite Corporation v. Prismo Holding CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1938
  3. Weil v. N. J. Richman Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1940

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rubinstein v. Silex Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1947
  2. Bucky v. SeboDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API